Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Shocking moment a Manus Island refugee collapses in a police station after being bashed with an iron bar

As usual, you are not given any context below.  The context is that the refugees on Manus are Muslims and treat non-Muslims with the usual contempt.  Australians generally ignore that but slight one of the Melanesians who live on Nauru and you are likely to get thumped.  Melanesisans are a notably warlike and aggressive people and they now know what the Afghans think of them.

And let us not forget that all the "refugees" are there of their own accord.  There is a standard offer open to them of an airfare back to their own country if they want to go.  Only problem:  They would have to work if they went back to Afghanistan. Getting free food and lodging on a pleasant tropical island is much more relaxing.  The natives are pesky but not nearly as pesky as their fellow-religionists

Two refugees on Manus Island who were attacked by locals wielding an iron bar have been pictured with deep gashes and blood dripping down their arms.

The Afghan refugees were set upon by several men as they walked from the beach to the bus stop in the main city of Lorengau on Wednesday around 5pm.

The refugees, who were verbally abused, robbed and beaten, were taken to a local police station and CPR was performed on one of the men after he collapsed on the station floor.

'They were surrounded by a group of seven locals who shouted abuse at them, demanded their clothes and shoes, and beat them up, and the attack ended when another local intervened to save them,' Human Rights Law Centre spokesman Daniel Webb said.

Shocking photos show the men walking to the station bloodied and in shock. One of the men held his arm up to stem the blood gushing down his wrist.

Bystanders helped to carry one of the men out of the police station and to hospital after he passed out from his injuries.  Both men were later returned to the detention centre, the Guardian reported.

Police believe there may have been a third refugee with the men as they walked from the beach, but he reportedly ran and hid in bushes during the attack.

'These guys have been on Manus for three years. They have seen their friend beaten to death in front of them,' Mr Webb said.

'One refugee has been shot. Another has had his throat slashed. They've been bashed by guards. They've been attacked by locals. They are genuinely fearful'.


Australia 'has lost moral compass' over immigration detention say various Leftists

What about the moral compass of the "refugees" who barge through the door of someone else's  home uninvited?  What about the moral compass of the "refugees" who come here and repay our hospitality with hate?  What about the moral compass of the people who already have refuge in nearby Pakistan but come all the way here because the handouts are better?  There are a lot of directions in which moral compasses can point -- depending on who is doing the pointing

Australia has "lost it's moral compass" when it comes to immigration detention according to New Zealand Labour foreign affairs spokesperson David Shearer.

The comments came as the leader of Britain's Liberal Democrats party Tim Farron called on the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson to speak to Australia's high commissioner about immigration policies.

Mr Shearer, a former Labour leader and United Nations humanitarian worker, said Australia's offshore detention regime was abysmal and unsustainable, and said Australian voters were prepared to "push under the carpet" knowledge of conditions on Nauru and Manus Island, in contrast to public condemnation of mistreatment inside the Northern Territory's Don Dale Youth Detention Centre that prompted a royal commission last month.

The comments came as Opposition Leader Bill Shorten prepares to push for a Senate inquiry into offshore detention in the new Parliament.

Mr Shearer has written to Australia's high commissioner in Wellington calling for a change in approach by the Turnbull government after more than 2000 incident reports from Nauru were published last week, arguing 150 refugees should be quickly resettled in New Zealand on the condition Australia's offshore detention camps were closed.

The leaked reports detailed sexual violence, child abuse, mistreatment and self-harm on Nauru, dating from 2012 until last year.

"They highlighted the fact that this policy is unsustainable," Mr Shearer said. "I mean it's almost like Australia has lost its moral compass in terms of where it's going.

"I really do think New Zealand, however it can, should make the offer to say 'look, what is it we can do to short-circuit this and bring these kids' detention to an end'."

"I do think Australia's reputation is being diminished as a result."

New Zealand offered to assist Australia in resettling asylum seekers in 2013 and 2015, but Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ruled out co-operation amid concerns it could give encouragement and "marketing opportunities" to people smugglers.

Mr Shearer linked the possible assistance to New Zealand's role in resettling asylum seekers caught up in the 2001 Tampa refugee crisis, who he said were doing "fabulously well" in New Zealand today.

"If we were to intervene and get involved in this, it would have to be on the basis that these camps are going to close down and we are helping to do that," he said.

"Their seeming indefinite detention is the most damaging for their medical and psychological health. Added to that is the fact it's illegal under Australian law for any doctor or health worker to speak publicly on the health or treatment of these people.

"Ultimately, the decision on what to do will be Australia's to make but there's no doubt the policy is unsustainable, and New Zealand needs to help bring a resolution in any way it can."

Last year, New Zealand suspended some assistance payments to Nauru over concerns about civil rights and the rule of law in the island nation.

Mr Farron told The Guardian detention of asylum seekers, including children, should be a last resort.

"I have written to Boris Johnson urging him to meet urgently with the Australian high commissioner to express deep concern about the situation in Nauru, and stress that their responsibilities under the 1951 convention apply the same in Nauru as they would to refugees in Australia," he said.


Volunteer firefighters vow to fight back after CFA board agreed to controversial pay deal

Leftist Premier Andrews has leant over backwards to help an extremist union but has just put the volunteers offside by backing their egregious claims.  Victoria will burn if the volunteers stay home but that is what the union leaders want:  More paid firemen, a bigger empire

The body representing volunteer fire brigades has responded to the CFA board’s decision to endorse a controversial pay deal with fury, promising the drawn-out dispute is far from over.

The nine-member board split five-four to endorse the enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) after a meeting at the headquarters in Burwood yesterday, which Emergency Services Minister James Merlino said would mean “the time for division is over”.

Mr Merlino urged firefighters to back the deal, saying legal action was unnecessary given the agreement would protect volunteers.

"It's disappointing that an organisation that receives taxpayer funds for the welfare of volunteer firefighters are using those resources to pursue unnecessary legal action," he said.

Volunteer Fire Brigade Victoria (VFBV) CEO Andrew Ford last night labelled the decision “a day of infamy that will burn in to the memory of every CFA volunteer”.

“We have instructed our legal team to take further action immediately… [after] Board members betrayed volunteers and ignored their responsibility and obligations to the public of Victoria,” Mr Ford said in a statement. “We now have no other choice if the real CFA is to be defended.”

CFA chief officer Steve Warrington said volunteer firefighters should move on from the dispute, and would still be lauded. “Our volunteers are some of the most battle-hardened, experienced firefighters,” Mr Warrington said.

The organisation will go to the Supreme Court on Monday to ask for an injunction to stop the deal, as fears grow that the EBA will hand too much power to the United Firefighters Union at the expense of the CFA’s 60,000 volunteers.

United Firefighters Union Secretary Peter Marshall said they had prevailed despite the “Liberal Party’s opportunistic attempt to manufacture a conflict between career and volunteer firefighters”.

The federal government has confirmed that in line with the Prime Minister’s promise, legislation to protect the volunteers will be introduced into the new parliament as soon as it starts sitting in a fortnight.

Opposition leader Matthew Guy accused the CFA board of being a “puppet” of the government. “The EBA is a disgrace. This EBA endorsed by this puppet board will do over volunteers, the 60,000 Victorians who protect us every fire season,” he said.

The EBA must now be voted on by UFU members, then ratified by the Fair Work Commission. The injunction would mean there can’t be a vote until the VFBV has been consulted over the deal, which it argues has not occurred.


Senator David Leyonhjelm files racism complaint because he was called an 'angry white male'

Leftists frequently refer to "white males" in various contexts, apparently quite unaware that they are being racially discriminatory

Senator David Leyonhjelm has lodged a complaint under the Racial Discrimination Act for comments made about him by a journalist.

The Liberal Democrat senator, from New South Wales, submitted the complaint last week after a Fairfax media article was published referring to him as a 'boorish and gormless as a result of being an angry white male', reported the Daily Telegraph.

It is reportedly the first complaint of its kind for the Australian Human Rights Commission (HRC) under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

Under this section, it states it is unlawful to commit an act which would reasonably offend or insult someone because of their race, colour, national or ­ethnic origin.

The Fairfax article reportedly criticised Senator Leyonhjelm for his traditional views on free speech and his campaign to revoke Section 18C.

In a bizarre turn of events, it means Senator Leyonhjelm is using the provision he wants to abolish to launch the action, in a bid to prove what he initially said was the absurdity of the law.

In his complaint to the HRC Senator Leyonhjelm said his colour was one of the reasons the comments were made.

'Other characteristics referred to in the article include being a boorish supercilious know-all with the empathy of a Besser-Block, hate speech apologist, wacky, a self-promoting misanthrope and a practitioner of infantile reasoning,' he said.

'The comments are reasonably likely in all the circumstances to offend or insult some white males.'

His complaint comes as pressure is building inside the government to re-examine repealing the law because of concerns it stifles free speech.


Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Re. Australia’s multicultural face is changing

I would like to see the definitions and categories upon which the statistics are built.

I suspect they are defining people by birth place, not by race.

Racial Chinese come here from all countries, so are they referring to the race or the birthplace? And British nowadays can be any race. How are they defining?

I have never been educated on statistics, but I have worked on surveys, and worked in several fields collecting stats on suicide, domestic violence, types of crime, criminogenics, drug and alcohol use and addictions, types of mental illness, and on other matters.

Something I observed is that the definitions and categories are unrealistic, thus the statistics are unrealistic too. And the definitions and categories are seldom revealed by those using the statistics to make their claims - why is that?
For skulduggery, that is why.

I have been involved in surveying offender's kinds of accommodation with categories such as homeless, renting, living with friends,... but no category for purchasing or owning a home. Then the gov't funded sociologists claims a high proportion of offenders are socioeconomically disadvantaged and none own their own home - yet all those who owned a home had no category and didn't answer or ticked another box instead. Then the welfare facility applies for more gov't funding (and give themselves more wages and perks and "training" holidays) on the basis that their clientele have less money than they really do and can't afford to help themselves. I have learnt that to point out obvious missing categories and vague or asymmetrical definitions risks one's employment. I have seen survey forms where the definition of female homelessness includes living with friends, sharing a flat when you would rather have your own, boarding houses, etc, when male homelessness is defined as living outdoors or a men's shelter. Then they claim a high rate of female homelessness, again for more funding and high paid welfare jobs, and to spend more time putting out leftist/feminist propaganda. I seen stat definitions on domestic violence that include vagaries like "economic, emotional, psychological, passive, micro"...etc kinds of violence included in definition of male violence but female violence is only physical. This to get sympathy and funding and more cushy jobs for psychs and welfare facilities, and to write press releases on the awful state of male violence and female victimhood. I've seen stats on one thing used to claim another. I have seen gang attacks redefined from one year to the next with more numbers to make a gang, then claim that gang attacks have reduced. And state water storage dams decommissioned when they dried up, or renamed recreational, then the state gov claimed their was a higher percentage of water storage, but didn't say several empty dams are no longer included. So although I'm no statistician I have seen enough of stat collecting to know that unless I see the definitions and categories upon which the stats are built, to compare them to the claim, then I don't give the stats and what is claimed from them much credit at all.

And I expect there are many more kinds of tricks get used than those few that I know of.